|Chris Clark manages the clean wood and
pellet stove program for the Maryland
|Rebate data provided by MEA|
|The Ravelli RV80 was tested at
fifty six% efficiency by a EPA
accredited test lab.
that performance was of these kinds of standard significance to shoppers and that maintaining it confidential served no valuable goal. That try was unsuccessful.  The Alliance is not appealing.
The simplicity of the non-catalytic stove helps make it the most well-known sort of stove in North The united states by much.  With most non-cats, the buyer only requirements to fret about a one lever to regulate the quantity of air in the firebox.  But some shoppers unwittingly buy a extremely unique sort of non-cat, a  downdraft stove, and often regret it.
Stove modify out applications, that switch out outdated stoves with new, EPA certified types could want to exclude downdraft stoves from eligible replacements as they could be the most difficult class of stove to operate regularly without having seen smoke.
|The authentic Frankin stove
was a downdraft with no
front door and typically
created for a smoky house.
Downdraft stoves have existed for centuries in numerous patterns. The authentic stove invented by Ben Franklin also experienced a downdraft included into the layout, and it is a single of the causes that the stove was so finicky and disfavored by the greater part of buyers. Franklin himself admitted that the stove was tough to function and took lots of interest and was not anything that “could be left to the servants.”  Later iterations of the Franklin stove included a doorway and most received rid of the downdraft.
The following seventy one wood and pellet stoves have been tested by accredited laboratories for efficiency. Buyers should consider acquiring 1 of these stoves if they want a stove that has a trustworthy effectiveness value.  However, with wood stoves, the shown efficiency signifies what shoppers can get if they use dry wooden and give the stove ample air.  With pellet stoves, the performance described by the lab is a great approximation of the effectiveness the customer can expect.
|Manufacturer Title||Product Identify||Emission Fee G/Hr||True Performance ||Kind|
|Kuma Stove Inc.||Sequoia||2.2||eighty four||Cat |
|Blaze King Industries||KEJ 1107 ||1.eight||eighty two||Cat |
|Woodstock Soapstone||Best Metal ||1.||82||Hybrid |
|Blaze King Industries||Princess PEJ  ||two.four||81||Cat |
|Blaze King Industries||Princess 35 ||2.one||eighty one||Cat |
|Ningbo Hongsheng||Comfortbilt HP5||2.five||81||Pellet|
|Regency (FPI)||Regency 3500||one.1||81||Cat |
|Woodstock Soapstone||Development Hybrid ||one.three||eighty one||Hybrid |
|Blaze King Industries||Ashord Chinook ||.eight||80||Cat |
|Blaze King Industries||Princess Insert  ||2||eighty||Cat |
|Regency (FPI)||LG Flushwood||one.eight||80||Cat |
|Travis Industries||Insert Hybrid ||.six||eighty||Hybrid |
|Travis Industries||Cape Cod ||.five||eighty||Hybrid |
|England’s Stove Functions||25-SSP01||.56||seventy nine||Pellet|
|Regency (FPI)||F5100 ||1.5||seventy nine||Cat |
|Travis Industries||Rockport||.eight||seventy eight||Cat |
|Seraph Industries||Genesis 108||2.1||seventy eight||Pellet |
|Blaze King Industries||Chinook Sirocco ||one.three||77||Cat |
|Jotul North The united states ||F55||3.5||seventy six||Non Cat|
|Travis Industries||Modest Flush   ||.nine||76||Hybrid |
|Blaze King Industries||Chinook Sirocco ||one.||75||Cat |
|Jotul North The us ||F118 CB||three.5||75||Non Cat|
|Pacific Power Hearth||TN20||two.one||seventy five||Non Cat|
|Pacific Power Hearth||Neo 1.six, Insert||three.nine||75||Non Cat|
|Pacific Energy Fireplace ||Neostone 1.6||three.four||seventy five||Non Cat |
|Sherwood Industries||Enviro 1700l||4.five||seventy five||Non Cat|
|Jotul North The usa ||F600||four.one||74||Non Cat|
|Jotul North America ||F45||2.3||74||Non Cat|
|Jotul North The united states ||F500||three.two||74||Non Cat|
|Pacific Strength Hearth||Neo two.5, insert ||two.nine||seventy four||Non Cat |
|Travis Industries||Evergreen||three.six||seventy four||Non Cat|
|Travis Industries||42CVT Wooden||.seven||73||Cat |
|American Strength Sys.||Baby Country S||one||seventy three||Pellet|
|Boru Stove Firm||Carraig Mor ||three.9||seventy three||Non Cat |
|Jotul North The usa ||F118 Black Bear||three||73||Non Cat|
|Jotul North The usa ||Tamarack||4.four||73||Non Cat|
|Jotul North The us ||F3CBII||3.8||73||Non Cat|
|Jotul North The us ||F602 CB||3.four||seventy three||Non Cat|
|Jotul North The usa ||F100 Nordic||three||73||Non Cat|
|Kuma Stove Inc.||Ashwood||3.5||seventy three||Non Cat|
|Kuma Stove Inc.||Scot HT-one||3.five||73||Non Cat|
|Kuma Stove Inc.||Wooden Basic||three.3||73||Non Cat|
|Travis Industries||42CVT Hearth||.7||73||Non Cat|
|Unforgetable Fire||Katydid||one.9||73||Non Cat|
|Jotul North The us ||50TL||two.eight||seventy two||Non Cat|
|Kuma Stove Inc.||Aspen||four.one||72||Non Cat|
|Sherwood Industries||Enviro 1200, i ||3.four||seventy two||Non Cat |
|American Strength Sys. ||Minor Rascal||1.one||71||Pellet|
|Blaze King Industries||Briarwood II/ninety ||3.5||seventy one||Non Ca |
|Fireplace & House Tech.||Mt. Vernon AE||1.seven||71||Pellet|
|Hearth & Home Tech.||Accentra-2||.62||71||Pellet |
|Jotul North The us ||C550 CB||4.five||71||Non Cat|
|Jotul North America ||F602 CB ||3.4||71||Non Cat |
|Even Temp, (St. Croix)||Prescott EXP EXL||.53||70||Pellet|
|England’s Stove Functions||15-SSW02||three.five||70||Non Cat|
|Quadrafire (HHT)||Explorer III||2.nine||70||Non Cat|
|Quadrafire (HHT)||Explorer II||2||sixty nine||Non Cat|
|Wiseway Pellet Stove||GW1949||one.nine||sixty nine||Pellet|
|Jotul North The usa ||Castine F400||3.8||sixty eight||Non Cat|
|US Stove Company||1269E||four.2||68||Non Cat|
|American Power Sys.||3500, 01 & 02||1||sixty seven||Pellet |
|Fireside & House Tech.||Advance||one.eight||67||Pellet |
|Pacific Energy Fireplace ||FP 25||3.five||sixty seven||Non Cat|
|Even Temp (St. Croix)||Hastings||1.1||66||Pellet|
|Even Temp (St. Croix)||Ashby-P||1||sixty six||Pellet |
|Jotul North The united states ||F370||2.6||66||Non Cat|
|Enjoyable Hearth, GHP ||WS-2720-B||4.five||sixty six||Non Cat|
|Pacific Strength Fireplace||PF16||3.one||sixty five||Non Cat |
|US Stove Company||5660E,||one.nine||sixty two||Pellet|
|Sherwood Industries||EF2, Chatham, ||1.8||fifty eight||Pellet|
|Gael Ulrich was a professor of
Chemical Engineering at the
University of New Hampshire
If flue gas temperature and composition are known, one can calculate the efficiency of a biomass combustor using the so-call “stack loss” technique. This paper explains in detail why that is possible and how to do it. Fortuitously, during the preparation of this bulletin, the Alliance for Green Heat published data from their testing of six pellet stoves this past September. Test equipment used in the AGH study delivered composition, temperature, and efficiency numbers. Investigators declined to report the efficiency numbers for various reasons, although they do mention a range of 60 to 75%.
Alliance for Green Heat Data
Brand Conc. (Figure 8) Temp. (oC) (Figure 9b)
Monday, December 8, 2014
by David Brooks
|Tom Butcher from Brookhaven Lab,
second from right, tests an automated
stove from New Zealand. Ben Myren,
left, did R&D work on it.
I don’t think very hard when I light up the old wood-burning stove in my basement. Turns out, that might be a problem.
“Combustion technology is incredibly complex. Numerous chemical engineers, combustion engineers, mechanical engineers around the world are constantly trying to understand the intricacies associated with combustion. It is absolutely not what you and I would think – just light a match … especially when you want to get clean combustion and use wood efficiently,” said Rob Rizzo, manager of the Renewable Thermal Program for the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources.
Rizzo was among the organizers of the 2014 Stove Design Workshop held in November at Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, the latest in a number of attempts to add some high-tech wizardry to that staple of New England life, the wood stove. (For details, see forgreenheat.blogspot.com/2014/11/rookie-wood-stove-makers-get-highest.html)
Why tinker with something as well-established as wood stoves?
Because, like me, most people don’t think too hard when using them, which makes them inefficient and polluting.
We use green wood or wet wood, and we fiddle with the damper in the wrong way, causing partial combustion and thus more pollution.
The Stove Design Workshop, like a national Stove Design Challenge in 2013 that featured two New Hampshire entries, wants to find technology that can better cope with our stupidity.
The five finalists in the design workshop used a variety of techniques to work around people, including oxygen sensors that control fuel-to-air ratio, a common emission-control technique in cars, and a New Zealand stove that has a “barometrically operated variable choke venturi tube” to control the amount of combustion air entering a stove, particularly at lower burn rates.
“The whole concept with the design challenge is to come up with solid-wood stove that eliminates the human interface. Basically hit a start button and walk away; that is the concept we’re aiming at,” he said.
This already happens with pellet stoves, of course, which is why pellets has led a wood-burning renaissance for building heat.
The drawback is that they burn pellets made of compressed sawdust rather than the wood I can snag for free off my property, especially after the Thanksgiving snowstorm knocked down so many big limbs.
The lure of free fuel means that a lot of people still burn non-pelletized wood for some or all of their heat, although it’s not clear how many.
I have never been able to find good data about people who use cordwood (a.k.a. “roundwood”) as their principal heat source, partly because it’s hard to pin down. I, for example, use it only as a minor supplement of the pellet stove in the living room and our oil-fired furnace.
Rizzo said he didn’t know any data either, but he said that wood stoves remain important, especially in western Massachusetts.
Just as important as convenience is cleanliness. Wood stoves can produce a lot of pollution, particularly fine-particle soot, that is a health hazard. This is particularly a problem around Keene, which has a lot of wood-burning stoves and a geography that traps air in certain weather conditions.
New Hampshire has used rebates to get people to turn in their old stoves for cleaner versions, although with limited success.
But those cleaner stoves aren’t all that great; they’re little more than old stoves with catalytic converters in the stovepipe. Hence the push to build a better mousetrap, so to speak.
“It’s exciting to see new ideas coming forward. We have some educated guesses but we need to do better,” Rizzo said.
“We need to collect more data, about efficiency, emissions, consumption volumes, and also source of wood, sustainability of wood source, quality of wood source. Because rural America is always going to be burning round wood.”
|2013 Design Challenge
in Wash. DC
The second phase of the project will feature an international stove technology competition to spotlight innovative and high performing pellet stoves and prototypes. The project will culminate in an international gathering at Brookhaven National Lab in New York, where pellet stoves will be tested and the top performers will receive awards. The focus will not just be on low emissions and high efficiency in a test lab setting, but also in the hands of consumers. The application to submit pellet stoves and stove prototypes for the competition will be available later this summer. The competition and workshop is scheduled for the week of April 4, 2016.
|Ben Myren, Tom Butcher and others
in a lab at Brookhaven at the 2014
Wood Stove Design Challenge
This pellet stove challenge marks the third Stove Design Challenge, and the second to take place at Brookhaven. Previous challenges, including the inaugural Wood Stove Design Challengeon the National Mall in 2013, focused on promoting technological innovations that would help ensure wood stoves burn cleaner in the hands of consumers. All the Stove Design Challenges involve stakeholder engagement in testing and assessing stoves, the opportunity to see and understand how testing works, and workshops and roundtables that bring together industry, regulators, air quality groups, non-profits and the media.
|Planning meeting for the 2013 Design
Challenge. Pictured (left to right) Ray
Albrecht, Rod Tinnemore, Mark Knaebe,
John Ackerly, Melissa Bollman, David Agrell,
Ellen Burkhard & Tom Butcher
Funding for the ongoing Wood Stove Design Challenge initiative has been provided by the New York State Energy and Research Development Authority (NYSERDA), Osprey Foundation, the US Forest Service and the Alliance for Green Heat.